Similarity detection

not plagiarism detection
I’m in the process of looking at the role that similarity detection tools (e.g. Turnitin and SafeAssign) can play in helping students improve their writing skills, and detect their own errors. My personal experience is that it’s a valuable tool – as long as you spend enough time explaining to students what should be similar, what shouldn’t and thus what to do about it. All the research I’ve found would seem to suggest the same (though from the work that Lynn Graham-Matheson & Simon Starr (2013) did the students were far more likely to think that the staff saw it primarily as Police force, than the staff thought they did). Morris (2015) suggests that could be the language used when staff introduced it.
What I’m looking for now, though, are any studies that counter this view? Has anyone got any work that suggests similarity tools are best used as a plagiarism police force?

Flynn, S. (2018). A module on Learning Technologies for teachers in Higher Education. Italian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(1), 119–129.
Dutton, W. H., & Fernandez, L. (2019). How Susceptible Are Internet Users? SSRN Electronic Journal.
Bower, B. L., & Hardy, K. P. (2004). From correspondence to cyberspace: Changes and challenges in distance education. New Directions for Community Colleges, 2004(128), 5–12.
Visitors & Residents. (2014, September 9). Retrieved January 29, 2019, from
Kirschner, P. A., & De Bruyckere, P. (2017). The myths of the digital native and the multitasker. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 135–142.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6.
Sime, J.-A., & Themelis, C. (n.d.). Exploring Video Literacy and the Practice of Educators. Retrieved October 8, 2018, from
Williams, J. B., & Jacobs, J. S. (2004). Exploring the use of blogs as learning spaces in the higher education sector. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 20, 232–247.
Mimirinis, M. (2018). Qualitative differences in academics' conceptions of e-assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 1–16.
Mitchell, K., Simpson, C., & Adachi, C. (2017, May 12). What's in a name? The ambiguity and complexity of technology enhanced learning roles – ASCILITE 2017. Retrieved August 14, 2018, from
Frensen, J. (2018, May 14). What is a Learning Technologist? | Digital Education [Blog]. Retrieved August 16, 2018, from
Hopkins, D. (2009, August 13). What is a Learning Technologist? – Technology Enhanced Learning Blog [Blog]. Retrieved August 16, 2018, from
Vaona, A., Banzi, R., Kwag, K. H., Rigon, G., Cereda, D., Pecoraro, V., … Moja, L. (2018). E‐learning for health professionals. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (1).
Raynis, M. (n.d.). Analysis of Instructional Design Job Announcements (2016), 59.
Kang, Y., & Ritzhaupt, A. D. (2015). A Job Announcement Analysis of Educational Technology Professional Positions: Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 43(3), 231–256.
van Horne, M. (2013, October 17). Introducing the ASU Instructional Designers [Infographic]. Retrieved August 16, 2018, from
Hobson, S. (2015, October 7). So What Do You Really Mean By "Instructional Designer"? - EdSurge News. Retrieved August 16, 2018, from
Patel, F. (2010). Exploring a New Model and Approach to the Scholarship of Teaching: The Scholarship Teaching Academy. The Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 1(1).
Green, D. A., & Little, D. (2016). Family portrait: a profile of educational developers around the world. International Journal for Academic Development, 21(2), 135–150.
Fraser, K., & Ling, P. (2014). How academic is academic development? International Journal for Academic Development, 19(3), 226–241.
JISC. (2014). Learning technologists. Retrieved August 16, 2018, from
Roxå, T., & Mårtensson, K. (2017). Agency and structure in academic development practices: are we liberating academic teachers or are we part of a machinery supressing them? International Journal for Academic Development, 22(2), 95–105.
James Jacob, W., Xiong, W., & Ye, H. (2015). Professional development programmes at world-class universities. Palgrave Communications, 1(1).
Knapper, C. (2016). Does educational development matter? International Journal for Academic Development, 21(2), 105–115.
Gibbs, G. (2013). Reflections on the changing nature of educational development. International Journal for Academic Development, 18(1), 4–14.
Anagnostopoulou, K. (2015, February). Delivering flexibly: Working with programme teams. Presented at the HeLF.
Deaker, L., Stein, S. J., & Spiller, D. (2016). You can't teach me: exploring academic resistance to teaching development. International Journal for Academic Development, 21(4), 299–311.
Medway, D., Roper, S., & Gillooly, L. (2018). Contract cheating in UK higher education: A covert investigation of essay mills. British Educational Research Journal, 44(3), 393–418.
Tomas, C., & Jessop, T. (2018). Struggling and juggling: a comparison of student assessment loads across research and teaching-intensive universities. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 1–10.
Pangrazio, L., & Selwyn, N. (2018). "It's Not Like It's Life or Death or Whatever": Young People's Understandings of Social Media Data. Social Media + Society, 4(3), 205630511878780.
Gravett, K., & Winstone, N. E. (2018). 'Feedback interpreters': the role of learning development professionals in facilitating university students' engagement with feedback. Teaching in Higher Education, 1–16.
Emery, R, & Atkinson, A. (n.d.). A Word in Your Ear Group Assessment Feedback: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly.
Nordmann, E., & Mcgeorge, P. (2018). Lecture capture in higher education: time to learn from the learners.
Hole, A. (2014). Open Badges: Exploring the value, potential and practicalities of a new way of recognising skills in Higher Education. Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, 0(0).
Harper, R., Bretag, T., Ellis, C., Newton, P., Rozenberg, P., Saddiqui, S., & van Haeringen, K. (2018). Contract cheating: a survey of Australian university staff. Studies in Higher Education, 1–17.
Bretag, T., Harper, R., Burton, M., Ellis, C., Newton, P., Rozenberg, P., … van Haeringen, K. (2018). Contract cheating: a survey of Australian university students. Studies in Higher Education, 1–20.
Masters, K. (2013). Edgar Dale's Pyramid of Learning in medical education: A literature review. Medical Teacher, 35(11), e1584–e1593.
Costa, C., Murphy, M., Pereira, A. L., & Taylor, Y. (2018). Higher education students' experiences of digital learning and (dis)empowerment. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology.
Rolfe Vivien. (2010). Can Turnitin be used to provide instant formative feedback? British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(4), 701–710.
Rayner, G., Papakonstantinou, T., & Gleadow, R. (2016). Comparing the self-efficacy and writing-related abilities of native and non-native English-speaking students. Cogent Education, 3(1).
Havemann, L., & Sherman, S. (2017). Assessment, Feedback and Technology: Contexts and Case Studies in Bloomsbury (p. ). Figshare.
Meer, N., & Chapman, A. (2014). Co-creation of Marking Criteria: Students as Partners in the Assessment Process. Business and Management Education in HE, 1–15.
Farzan, R., & Kraut, R. E. (2013). Wikipedia classroom experiment: bidirectional benefits of students’ engagement in online production communities. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 783–792). Paris, France: ACM.
Rose, E. (2016). Reflection in asynchronous online postsecondary courses: a reflective review of the literature. Reflective Practice, 17(6), 779–791.
Adachi, C., Tai, J. H.-M., & Dawson, P. (2018). Academics' perceptions of the benefits and challenges of self and peer assessment in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(2), 294–306.
Bennett, S., Dawson, P., Bearman, M., Molloy, E., & Boud, D. (2017). How technology shapes assessment design: Findings from a study of university teachers: How technology shapes assessment design. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(2), 672–682.